Oil . . . Let it Burn

September 30, 2021

We tweeted something this morning. As commodity and energy prices continued to inflect upwards, we tweeted this.  This . . . this seemingly insensitive comment. 

We actually didn’t mean to “let it burn” as in “we want the world to burn.” No, we don’t take energy scarcity and the hardships that will accompany it for untold billions in poverty lightly. We actually meant that faced with the shortage, OPEC+ will decide to “let it burn,” to let it continue as they slowly release additional supplies to the market.   

Having tweeted it though, we spent a moment to reflect on it . . . and on reflection?  LET IT BURN. 

Let it burn because the ferocity and vociferousness of climate change activism has driven us to poorly considered, ill-conceived, and just plain insipid policies and regulations that threaten our energy security today. Let it burn because only by letting it burn, will the world learn that we should be stewards and caretakers of the very thing that powers our modern society.  Let it burn because we’re now in the situation where “the haves” have chained “the have nots” to a clown car driving off a proverbial energy cliff, and “the haves” must face the political, social, and economic consequences of their willful energy ignorance, deception, and completely misguided and myopic pronouncements and policies.

We are not climate change deniers or apologists.  We trust the scientists who’ve spent years drilling arctic core samples, running computer simulations and studying weather patterns.  Shouldn’t we?  Shouldn’t we trust those who’ve dedicated decades of their lives to understanding such a complex problem over questionably functioning adults who think in only 140 characters?  We’ve never walked into an operating room and started screaming out instructions and we don’t intend to, ever.

Could they be proven wrong?  Sure, but science evolves.  The very nature of science means we take our best theories and we test them.  Today’s science tells us that climate change is happening and the intensity and volatility of the swings have increased.  So yes, we probably need to change our energy consumption behavior.  We have to change.  We need to change.  But we won’t, and that’s what we know.

The minute you cross climate change with human behavior?  That’s our field.  You’re in our house now because human behavior is all about incentives, and incentives abound in our intertwined and interlinked global economy.  It’s through this lens that we’ve deduced . . . climate change activism as it stands today?  It will fail catastrophically.

While we worry in the US about income inequality between billionaires and thousand-aires, real income inequality exists globally.  It’s between a person living in a modern industrialized country and another enduring substance living.  The have nots, the “emerging markets” (“EMs”) of the world want what we all want.  Security, a modicum of economic security.  A basic standard of living that allows them to provide for their families and those they care for, and perhaps to even dream and take steps today for a better tomorrow.

The developed markets though have said no.  Our climate change mission supersedes all that you dare to dream of, and the delay of those dreams, the suffering you must endure for slower economic development, is the sacrifice YOU must proffer on OUR collective mission to achieve a greener world. Never mind that we could realize both of our dreams if we embraced nuclear energy or build pipelines to transport cleaner burning natural gas.  Never mind that the renewables we so lovingly embrace are woefully inadequate for our energy consumption needs.  Never mind that any energy source we choose today is a compromise because we’ve yet to develop the technology that provides near limitless energy without some damaging repercussions. 

We will.  We will perfect fusion, but that’s a few decades away.  For now, only hard conversations and choices remain.  The conversations about my sacrifice though starts and stop at my border. For developed markets, “not in my backyard” dominates. Not in my neighborhood, not in my zip code and in certain cases, not in my country.  Nuclear advocates?  Please take a seat next to the Haitian refugees, we’ll call your number when it’s up.  For now, everyone sacrifice while we constrain, strangle, and choke fossil fuel productions. For now my mission is your mission.

If so . . . let it burn.  Let it burn, because assuming EMs will share this burden with us means we’ve neglected human nature.  Telling 1.4B in India who make $2K/year and 1.4B in China who make $10K/year that climate change is upon us and that the US ($60K/year) and EU ($35K/year) demands “global sacrifices,” is beyond hubris, it’s delusional thinking.  At best it’s diplomatically callous. It’s a complete disregard for the hardships of those climbing out of poverty, and it corrodes any legitimacy and trust we actually need to begin a real dialogue about tackling climate change.  It’s a flight of fancy that produces absurd proclamations like this from China. 

China’s pledged to stop building coal power plants . . . outside of China. No details about “funding” overseas projects as part of China’s One Belt One Road push, nor about the other 20+ coal power plants being built in China.  China currently consumes >50% of the coal used today, but they’ll stop building new coal-fired projects abroad. Brilliant. That’s trolling on a global level.

Per Goldman Sachs, we’re currently drawing inventories at 4.5M bpd.  4.5M bpd of total liquids. 

We estimate OPEC+ has spare capacity of around 3.3M to 4M bpd, and if Goldman’s figures are to be believed we’ll need all of that spare capacity to be brought online quickly. We’ll largely be balanced then, but wait, there’s more. We’ve yet to account for the higher demand coming from Japan lifting emergency COVID restrictions on October 1, transatlantic and transpacific flights resuming as US lifts bans and lowers restrictions, and Asia Pacific continuing its recovery.  Unreal. The pace of our energy crisis is quickening and prices will become increasingly volatile as the shortages reverberate globally.  Whatever the price our misguided climate policies would have cost are ratcheting ever higher.

It’s too hard though right?  Because a real dialogue about energy consumption, who should sacrifice, who should pay more, where we can find more energy, what we can do, and who should bear the burden in costs, funding, resources, land, etc. would mean tradeoffs (i.e., real sacrifice), and for those in the developed markets, that very word, sacrifice is anathema.  YOUR sacrifice though, that’s okay.  In fact that’s sacrosanct because that’s how we’ll do this.  So thank YOU for your service in this collective effort.  You’ll pay and suffer more, but we’ll laud you for it.  Words are cheap, but energy won’t be.  So let it burn.